HB87 amends New Mexico’s criminal sexual contact statute to remove the requirement that the non-consensual touching involve an “unclothed” intimate part of the victim. Under current law, criminal sexual contact is defined as unlawful, intentional touching or application of force without consent to the unclothed intimate parts of another adult, or causing another adult to touch one’s intimate parts. The bill broadens that definition so the offense can be committed regardless of whether the intimate part is clothed, while leaving the existing definition of “intimate parts” unchanged.
The bill also preserves the statute’s existing structure for penalties and exceptions. It keeps the distinction between misdemeanor criminal sexual contact and fourth-degree felony criminal sexual contact when force or coercion is used, especially where there is personal injury, multiple perpetrators, or a deadly weapon. The psychotherapist exceptions remain intact, including inadvertent contact, casual social contact, and legitimate therapeutic conduct.
Impact
HB87 would expand the reach of New Mexico’s criminal sexual contact law by making non-consensual touching of intimate parts actionable even when the contact occurs over clothing. This change would likely make it easier for prosecutors to charge sexual contact offenses in a wider range of cases and could increase the number of incidents covered by the statute. The bill amends Section 30-9-12 NMSA 1978 and affects defendants, victims, prosecutors, and courts applying the criminal sexual contact framework.
Sentiment
The available voting history shows strong support for the bill, with the House passing HB87 unanimously on final passage by a vote of 65-0. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, so there is no recorded debate in the supplied materials. Based on the vote, the bill appears to have been viewed favorably and as a clarifying or strengthening measure rather than a controversial policy change.
Contention
No specific points of contention are reflected in the provided transcripts, and the final House vote was unanimous. The main substantive issue implied by the bill text is whether criminal sexual contact should require skin-to-skin contact or should also cover touching through clothing. Supporters likely view the change as closing a loophole and better protecting victims, while any opposition would likely focus on the scope of criminal liability and evidentiary concerns, but no such objections appear in the supplied record.